Categories
Archives
Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !

Posts Tagged ‘Obamacare’

Under Obamacare a micro chip would be implanted into your neck to track your Healthcare Visits or any other activity deemed by the secretary

Microchiping included in Healthcare Bill page 1004

2883Share

The Obama Health care bill under Class II (Paragraph 1, Section B) specifically includes ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable.” Then on page 1004 it describes what the term “data” means in paragraph 1, section B:

14 ‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to in15 formation respecting a device described in paragraph (1),

16 including claims data, patient survey data, standardized 17 analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of 18 data from disparate data environments, electronic health 19 records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the 20 Secretary”

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? Let’s see… Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is a “implantable radiofrequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”

THE OFFICIAL EXPLANATION AND PROPAGANDA:

This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option. With the reform of the private insurance companies, who charge outrageous rates, many people will switch their coverage to a more affordable insurance plan. This means the number of people who choose the public option will increase. This also means the number of people chipped will be plentiful as well. The adults who choose to have a chip implanted are the lucky (yes, lucky) ones in this case. Children who are “born in the United States who at the time of birth is not otherwise covered under acceptable coverage” will be qualified and placed into the CHIP or Children’s Health Insurance Program (what a convenient name). With a name like CHIP it would seem consistent to have the chip implanted into a child. Children conceived by parents who are already covered under the public option will more than likely be implanted with a chip by the consent of the parent. Eventually everyone will be implanted with a chip. And with the price and coverage of the public option being so competitive with the private companies, the private company may not survive. The Beast intends to control the world and the activities of all humans on the planet with this tracking data chip.

House GOP moves to defund health care law

House Republicans are taking another shot at the health care law, this time with a threat to cut off funding.

By Catalina Camia, USA TODAY

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said he expects an amendment to defund the law will be offered next week when the House considers a budget for the rest of 2011.

The amendment is likely to be offered by Rep. Dennis Rehberg, R-Mont., chairman of the House appropriations panel that funds the Health and Human Services Department. Rehberg announced recently that he will run in 2012 for the Senate seatnow held by Democrat Jon Tester.

Cantor told reporters on Tuesday that “one way or the other” the budget bill will “preclude any funding” for the health care, and spoke of Rehberg’s “insistence” that such a provision will be offered.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi’s office sent out an e-mail to reporters chiding Republicans for the defunding effort.

“Instead of focusing on Americans’ number one priority — jobs — Republicans are threatening patients’ rights and moving to put health insurance companies back in charge,” said Drew Hammill, a Pelosi spokesman.

When Rehberg was appointed chairman of the health appropriations panel, he made clear to reporters that President Obama’s signature domestic achievement was in his sights.

“I will defund Obamacare if we’re not successful repealing it,” Rehberg told the Bozeman (Mont.) Daily Chronicle.

The GOP-led House last month easily passed a bill to repeal the health care law, but majority Democrats blocked a similar effort in the Senate.

Meanwhile, according to The Hill, an Iowa Republican told a Tea Party gathering that the effort to defund the health care law has a precedent.

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said Democrats used the same strategy to cut off funding for the Vietnam War. But he told the town hall meeting that he’ll push to defund the law permanently.

Governers are Fleeing Obamacare – States of Resistance

The Senate Judiciary Committee held its first-ever hearing on the constitu­tionality of ObamaCare yesterday, and talk about a barn door clos­ing. After federal Judge Roger Vinson struck down on Monday the entire statute in a suit brought by 26 states, some states are already suspending any efforts to comply with its regulations and mandates. ‘Tor Wisconsin, the federal health-care law is dead,” Attorney General J.R. Van Hollen said in a statement, unless Judge Vinson’s de­cision is stayed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Florida Governor Rick Scott said he had no intention of wasting “time and money” executing the for-now defunct law, and his in­surance commissioner returned a $1 million federal assistance grant. Idaho will also freeze implementation, and we hope the remaining 23 states will join the rejectionists.

For all the liberal squawking, Florida, et al., are well within their legal rights: A federal court issued a binding judgment voiding the law, with Judge Vinson noting that he trusted the Administration would obey the “long­standing presumption” that such a judgment is “the functional equivalent of an injunction.” Yet the White House and Health and Hu­man Services have already said they’ll con­tinue running ObamaCare as if nothing has changed. Imagine the rule-of-law furor if the Bush Administration had said a wiretapping or other civil liberties ruling didn’t matter. The Obama Justice Department can file an appeal asking the 11th Circuit for a stay, and it will—but as soon as it does, it will be forced to concede that the Administration is cur­rently flouting the law. Florida Attorney Gen­eral Pam Bondi deserves particular credit for holding Justice’s feet to the fire on this point. Even if a stay is granted, the states should say that the uncertainty about thesurvival of ObamaCare is so great that they shouldn’t have to squander resources implementing it. The states could simply refuse to do so and let the feds take over. An alternative is to im­plement their own market friendly alterna­tives for ObamaCare’s “exchanges” and other state-based policy decisions, even if the Ad­ministration objects. HHS has the option of running the exchanges for the states, but it will find this difficult to do if a majority of states resist.

Senate Democrats circled the wagons to defeat a repeal amendment 51-47 last night, but that defensive position won’t hold for­ever. They did relent on the 1099 reporting mandate, which the Senate voted to rescind 81 to 17. One promising next step for the GOP is a bill from Wyoming’s John Barra so that would allow states to opt out of some of the other mandates. The Administration claims this would strip Americans of “consumer pro­tections,” but this is a case in which such “protections” are already harming consumers by causing higher insurance rates.

The larger story here is that the legal and political challenges against ObamaCare are revealing the rotten process and substance of this misbegotten law, and that the only way to fix this is to repeal it and start over.

How Your Senator Voted on Obamacare Repeal

Thursday, 03 Feb 2011 08:32 AM
Here’s how your Senator voted on Obamacare repeal:

Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Yea Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Begich (D-AK), Nay Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Boozman (R-AR), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Bennet (D-CO), Nay Udall (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Blumenthal (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Not Voting
Delaware: Carper (D-DE), Nay Coons (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Nelson (D-FL), Nay Rubio (R-FL), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Crapo (R-ID), Yea Risch (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Indiana: Coats (R-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Moran (R-KS), Yea Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: McConnell (R-KY), Yea Paul (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Nay Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Brown (R-MA), Yea Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Franken (D-MN), Nay Klobuchar (D-MN), Nay
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Wicker (R-MS), Yea
Missouri: Blunt (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Nay Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Johanns (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Nay
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Ayotte (R-NH), Yea Shaheen (D-NH), Nay
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Udall (D-NM), Nay
New York: Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Nay
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Hagan (D-NC), Nay
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Portman (R-OH), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Merkley (D-OR), Nay Wyden (D-OR), Nay
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Toomey (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Nay Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Hatch (R-UT), Yea Lee (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (D-VA), Not Voting Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Nay Murray (D-WA), Nay
West Virginia: Manchin (D-WV), Nay Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Johnson (R-WI), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea

Read more on Newsmax.com

~ Oh, I see… NOW it is “Judicial Activism”!

Obama’s words are used against him

In ruling against President Obama‘s health care law, federal Judge Roger Vinson used Mr. Obama‘s own position from the 2008 campaign against him, arguing that there are other ways to tackle health care short of requiring every American to purchase insurance.

“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.

Judge Vinson, a federal judge in the northern district of Florida, struck down the entire health care law as unconstitutional on Monday, though he is allowing the Obama administration to continue to implement and enforce it while the government appeals his ruling.

The footnote was attached to the most critical part of Judge Vinson‘s ruling, in which he said the “principal dispute” in the case was not whether Congress has the power to tackle health care, but whether it has the power to compel the purchase of insurance.

Judge Vinson used Mr. Obama‘s campaign words from an interview withCNN to show that there are other options that could fall within the Constitution — including then-candidate Obama‘s plan.

During the presidential campaign, one key difference between Mr. Obama and his chief opponent, then-Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, wasMrs. Clinton‘s plan required all Americans to purchase insurance, andMr. Obama‘s did not.

In the heat of the primaries in 2008, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman predicted Mr. Obama‘s opposition to an individual mandate could come back to haunt him: “If Mr. Obama gets to the White Houseand tries to achieve universal coverage, he’ll find that it can’t be done without mandates — but if he tries to institute mandates, the enemies of reform will use his own words against him.”

Mr. Obama has since defended the constitutionality of the individual mandate, arguing it’s the linchpin of the program to bring in more customers, which is key to expanding the availability and affordability of insurance.

Much of the 78-page ruling was a discussion of how the nation’s founding fathers, such as James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, set limits on congressional power. Judge Vinson also hypothesized that, under the Obama administration‘s legal theory, the government could mandate eating broccoli.

White House officials said that sort of “surpassingly curious reading” called into question Judge Vinson‘s entire ruling.

“There’s something thoroughly odd and unconventional about the analysis,” said a White House official who briefed reporters late Monday afternoon, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !